Generative AI in Higher Education Management: A Mixed-Methods Study of School Leaders' Awareness, Readiness, and Adoption Intentions

Authors

  • Erwin Salvatierra

Keywords:

generative AI; higher education; academic leadership; institutional governance; technology acceptance

Abstract

This study examined higher education school leaders' awareness, readiness, and adoption intentions regarding th use of generative AI in institutional management. An exploratory convergent mixed-methods design was used to integrate survey results and qualitative written responses from 24 school leaders representing 10 universities. The instrument measured awareness, readiness, and adoption intention through Likert-scale items and used open-ended prompts to explore perceived opportunities, concerns, and enabling conditions for responsible use. Descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, Spearman correlations, and reflexive thematic analysis were employed. The findings showed high awareness (M = 3.82, SD = 0.52) and high adoption intention (M = 3.61, SD = 0.63), but only moderate readiness (M = 3.36, SD = 0.61). Awareness was positively related to readiness (rs = .62, p = .001) and adoption intention (rs = .59, p = .003), while readiness showed the strongest relationship with adoption intention (rs = .68, p < .001). Qualitative findings identified five themes: strategic efficiency under human oversight; governance and data protection as prerequisites; leadership-focused training; accuracy and reputational risk; and uneven access and resistance. The integrated findings indicate that leaders are not merely asking whether generative AI is useful; they are asking whether their institutions can use it responsibly. The study recommends leadership-centered professional development, explicit governance protocols, low-risk pilot projects, and human-centered accountability structures.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.25.6.17

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

An, Y., Yu, J. H., & James, S. (2025). Investigating the higher education institutions' guidelines and policies regarding the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, research, and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22, Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00507-3

Bearman, M., Ryan, J., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review. Higher Education, 86(2), 369-385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in reflexive thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3

Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students' voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8

Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510

Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). Future research recommendations for transforming higher education with generative AI. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100197

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Dempere, J., Modugu, K., Hesham, A., & Ramasamy, L. K. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1206936. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1206936

Dotan, R., Parker, L. S., & Radzilowicz, J. G. (2024). Responsible adoption of generative AI in higher education: Developing a points-to-consider approach based on faculty perspectives. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 2033-2046). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3630106.3659023

European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. (2022). Ethical guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence and data in teaching and learning for educators. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/153756

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 Pt 2), 2134-2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30(4), 681-694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1

Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1

García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2023). The perception of artificial intelligence in educational contexts after the launch of ChatGPT: Disruption or panic? Education in the Knowledge Society, 24, Article e31279. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.31279

Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLOS ONE, 15(5), Article e0232076. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232076

Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111116699

Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Shum, S. B., Santos, O. C., Rodrigo, M. T., Cukurova, M., Bittencourt, I. I., & Koedinger, K. R. (2022). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(3), 504-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1

Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gaševi?, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, Article 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001

Ifenthaler, D., & Schumacher, C. (2016). Student perceptions of privacy principles for learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 923-938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9477-y

Jin, Y., Yan, L., Echeverria, V., Gaševi?, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100348

Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389-399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298224

Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Lai, C. Y., Cheung, K. Y., & Chan, C. S. (2023). Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation in ChatGPT adoption to support active learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, Article 100178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100178

Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators' perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221

Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarok or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), Article 100790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790

Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), Article 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410

Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727

Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson. https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/Intelligence-Unleashed-Publication.pdf

Mah, D. K., & Groß, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring faculty use, self-efficacy, distinct profiles, and professional development needs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00490-1

Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693

Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041

Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B. P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4), 4221-4241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en

Ouyang, F., Zheng, L., & Jiao, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in online higher education: A systematic review of empirical research from 2011 to 2020. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7893-7925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10925-9

Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8

Raji, I. D., Smart, A., White, R. N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D., & Barnes, P. (2020). Closing the AI accountability gap: Defining an end-to-end framework for internal algorithmic auditing. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 33-44). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372873

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.

Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 582-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3

Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 342-363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers' adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009

Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity Press.

Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., & Javed, I. (2024). ChatGPT awareness, acceptance, and adoption in higher education: The role of trust as a cornerstone. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x

Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe and trustworthy. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1741118

Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510-1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479366

Strzelecki, A. (2024). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students' acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5142-5155. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881

Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x

UNESCO. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policymakers. UNESCO. Retrieved May 20, 2026, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the future of teaching and learning: Insights and recommendations. Retrieved May 20, 2026, from https://tech.ed.gov/ai-future-of-teaching-and-learning/

Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterizing and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, Article 148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 223-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marin, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0

Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Isteni?, A., Spector, M., Liu, J. B., Yuan, J., & Li, Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence in education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021, Article 8812542. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8812542

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Salvatierra, E. . (2026). Generative AI in Higher Education Management: A Mixed-Methods Study of School Leaders’ Awareness, Readiness, and Adoption Intentions. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 25(6), 413–435. Retrieved from https://www.ijlter.myres.net/index.php/ijlter/article/view/2904

Issue

Section

Articles